TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

jgraves_99 Archive

View 0 posts and 93 comments by jgraves_99 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Many people aren't aware that it's even a law and that it's designed to protect the innocent.
/r/MensRights31/05/18 08:08 PM
1

In order to be found guilty of the crime of filing a false police report, a state prosecutor must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt: The false report or statement was made by the defendant The false report was offered in response to legitimate inquiries by a police officer The statement addressed a material fact about an offense, incident, or crime within the police officer’s concerns The defendant made the statement knowing that it was false The defendant made the false rep…
/r/MensRights31/05/18 07:02 PM
2

That is incorrect. Insufficient evidence to convict does not automatically provide evidence to convict for falsely filing. The legal system works based on evidence and being unable to convict someone of a crime isnt evidence that it was false.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 10:33 PM
3

Unless there is evidence that they have filed a false report, there is absolutely no risk to those who file honestly. Crimes require evidence to prosecute and I am curious about what evidence you believe an honest individual would present that would lead law enforcement to be compelled into an investigation?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 04:52 PM
2

You're welcome, have a good day!
/r/MensRights30/05/18 04:43 PM
2

Filing a false report to a peace officer is already illegal. However, it is a law which is rarely enforced and difficult to discover compelling reasons to investigate without extreme circumstances or cooperation from the individual who committed the false filing. As far as I am aware, this being on the books has had no impact of the rates of reporters from honest citizens.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 03:52 PM
1

I would disagree that the former gets brushed away. However, the legal system has no fault on whether the accusation is brushed away in political, employment, or general areas of life. What you're describing is an issue with our media and a registry won't stop people from claiming the same thing without filing a false police report. The filing of a false report with peace officers is the legal term and the issue this deals with legally. Depending on the state and region, it can be a felony but a…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 03:19 PM
1

To convict an individual for filing a false report with a peace officer, there must be compelling evidence to warrant law enforcement to investigate. If law enforcement found adequate evidence to issue an arrest, the option to bring charges would be delegated to the District Attorney. The District Attorney reviews the case and (ideally) based on its merits decides if pursuing legal actions would be in the best interest of the district they represent.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 03:10 PM
2

So many people here don't seem to understand how laws even work in the first place. I had to explain to someone that you're not automatically guilty of filing a false report when there's insufficient evidence to convict the accused.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 03:01 PM
1

You'd happily tell innocent men in prison that you'd like to deter their accusers from ever recanting and setting them free?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 03:00 PM
1

"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:58 PM
2

It's like you didn't read my comment at all.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:58 PM
0

"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:57 PM
0

In this thought experiment are both of the things filed with a peace officer? Furthermore, are both ending with me being convicted? Both of them would absolutely destroy my life and leave me with loads of debt that would ruin my life. Especially if I wasn't allowed to serve time concurrently for that list of four felonies. I agree that there should be some sort of gradient for the severity of the punishment based on the punishment which would have been rendered if the false filing had not been d…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:20 PM
1

We have law enforcement uninterested in pursuing crimes of this nature because we have District Attorneys refusing to prosecute. The District Attorneys need to be convinced to enforce this law. A registry shouldn't be the compelling reason for the law enforcement to investigate and the DA to prosecute cases with merit. Forcing the DA is what has gotten those who've urinated in public onto the list. That should have been up to the DA's digression depending on the details of the case.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:12 PM
0

Failure to enforce the law at all is what fails to be a deterrent. As with all laws, there has to be compelling reason for law enforcement to investigate. Simply being found not guilty of the crime isn't adequate to investigate the accuser. Of course, even with adequate evidence, it takes law enforcement choosing to dedicate their time to finding the evidence and it takes a District Attorney willing to prosecute. Unfortunately, we have a void of either.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 02:00 PM
0

I think there's a crucial distinction to be made on whether an investigation turned up that an accusation was false, compared to if the accuser confessed that their accusation was false. My wife suggests that depending on the severity of the crime which was falsely alleged should determine the severity of punishment for filing of a false report. As for the life ruining part, that very much is a product of a judicial system willing to convict with inadequate evidence and the jury (as a representa…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:54 PM
1

I don't see that message in their comment but I may be reading it in a way they didn't intend.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:39 PM
0

As long as crimes require evidence to convict, it wouldn't effect honest reports in the slightest.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:37 PM
1

Depending on how it was enforced, it could also deter those who've made false accusations from coming forward and freeing innocent people. I prefer innocent people spending the minimum amount of time behind bars.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:35 PM
1

Yes, the crime of filing a false report with a peace officer is different than simply lying. Very rarely are those crimes pursued due to a lack of evidence that would compel an investigation.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:33 PM
1

Maybe I'm not explaining the scenario adequately. Consider every single instance where the accuser admitted they lied and an innocent individual was freed. When you punish those who come forward, they don't come forward, and those innocent people stay in jail. Would you prefer all those people stay silent in order to avoid punishment thereby keeping innocent people in prison?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:23 PM
1

Relevant username.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:18 PM
2

Legally speaking, lying about anything while filing a police report is called filing a false report. The topic the accuser is lying about doesn't change the nature of the crime. Lying about being assaulted isn't a crime of a violent nature. Lying about being robbed isn't a crime of a larcenous nature. Lying about people doing donuts in your front yard isn't a crime of a vehicular nature. There already are laws on the books against filing false reports which are not enforced. This lack of enforce…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:17 PM
2

How the legal system works is that to convict someone of a crime, say the crime of filing a false report, there must be adequate evidence to support that the accused purposefully filed a report they knew to be false. So, in the case where a report was filed by person A against person B, insufficient evidence to convict doesn't implicate person A as having filed a false report. As I previously said, there must be sufficient evidence that person A purposefully filed the report while knowing the re…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 01:12 PM
1

Are you arguing that it has merit to be on that list?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 12:14 PM
-2

Is it more important that women be punished for lying or that innocent men are freed? To clarify, I certainly do believe that those discovered to have filed a false report should be punished by law unless their actions would free an innocent person. It's more important that innocents are freed than to incentivize them to be silent and keep that innocent person in prison.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 12:12 PM
-1

Legally speaking, lying about anything while filing a police report is called filing a false report. The topic the accuser is lying about doesn't change the nature of the crime. Lying about being assaulted isn't a crime of a violent nature. Lying about being robbed isn't a crime of a larcenous nature. Lying about people doing donuts in your front yard isn't a crime of a vehicular nature.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 12:07 PM
0

I'm confused by your comment. At first you say that innocents being jailed for rape is worse than those actually guilty of rape. Then you go on to say that freeing these innocent people isn't more important than punishing those who have put them there. Am I reading you correctly?
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:51 AM
3

A law which is not enforced isn't much of a deterrent in the first place. Currently, there are laws against filing false reports but they aren't investigated often by law enforcement and they aren't prosecuted often by the DA. After an innocent is convicted and imprisoned, shouldn't the first priority be to free an innocent person? That's why I don't think those who admit to filing false reports should be deterred by penalizing them for coming forward and telling the truth.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:42 AM
2

Maybe you didn't read my comment. I already found a way to address the issue of false reports and that's to encourage the DA to prosecute those who file falsely. If you'd like to join my efforts, write your District Attorney and let them know that you feel very strongly about crimes of this nature being prosecuted. Remind them that crimes of this nature not only harm innocents, but waste valuable time and resources of his office and those of law enforcement. You should also voice your concerns i…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 11:03 AM
3

People filing false reports to peace officers certainly are a big issue that drains the resources of both our law enforcement and our justice system. The DA should certainly take the matter seriously and prosecute those who do so.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 10:34 AM
1

Generally, people tend not to take actions to help others if it will harm themselves. To minimize the harm coming to those wrongfully imprisoned, those who have filed false reports which have put them there should not be incentivized to stay silent. Currently, they aren't often charged unless the false filing was especially heinous. For those cases of filing a false report to a peace officer that have been discovered by law enforcement should certainly be prosecuted by the DA to the fullest exte…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 10:31 AM
-2

You're in luck because there's a law already on the book to deal with issues like this. It's referred to as a false police report to a peace officer. Depending on your state, this may be a misdemeanor or a felony. Write your District Attorney to let them know that you feel very strongly about crimes of this nature being prosecuted. Remind them that crimes of this nature not only harm innocents, but waste valuable time and resources of his office and those of law enforcement. You should also voic…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 10:18 AM
17

I think you may have misread my comment. At no point am I addressing how it may effect those truthfully reporting sexual assaults. What I am addressing is how it will effect all those who admit they have lied after someone is wrongfully convicted. All those stories we hear about people admitting it never happened? They'll disappear and more men will be kept behind bars because those who put them there would be punished for freeing them.
/r/MensRights30/05/18 09:35 AM
94

There's so many things wrong with the Sex Offender Registry right now (such as public urination being on the list). So why would we add another thing that really isn't even of a sexual nature to the list? I understand the desire to inform the public about dangers they might face from those willing to file a false police report. However, do you know the effect this would have? It punishes those who do come forward to clear the names of those they've wronged. Do you think as many people will admit…
/r/MensRights30/05/18 09:12 AM
0

As someone who has attended a Hackathon, this happens all the time but it's not identity politics. It's the judges treating programming as a business presentation. I've seen the business majors competing and win with no coding. What they did was unethical but it's your group's fault for not having actual rules to enforce or guidelines for judging. tl;dr It's not discrimination, Devpost just sucks.
/r/MensRights25/04/18 07:36 AM
6

Why are these groups allowed to create extra work for city workers?
/r/MensRights23/01/18 04:17 AM
4

Strangely enough, there are many cases where the courts don't, which means it's been proven.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 07:09 PM
0

Perhaps they'll be more concise the next time. Speak accurately and you won't waste time the next time you try to breach the same topic.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 03:25 PM
3

Stating things concisely and accurately gains you everything.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 03:13 PM
3

I was bored and had time to kill.
/r/MensRights25/12/17 02:57 PM
2

Do you think there is no possible evidence that you can share with the police that can prove rape?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 09:05 AM
1

You don't think the answer pertains to whether or not you can prove rape when asking if it can be proven?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:55 AM
2

I am not sure if you still believe that you can't prove rape. Do you still hold to your original statement?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:51 AM
1

Edit: Sorry! Didn't realize you weren't the person who had been responding to me! Also, yes?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:47 AM
2

So cops prove rape?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:40 AM
6

So what you're saying is that the courts get people to incriminate themselves because it's impossible for law enforcement to prove otherwise?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:27 AM
20

Considering that the courts frequently convict rapists, do the stars align often?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 08:11 AM
21

So, in your first post, your statement that "you can't prove rape" is incorrect?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 07:58 AM
18

So, do you think it's possible for the court to prove that raped happened?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 07:46 AM
45

So, if you can't prove rape, what do the courts do when they charge someone with rape?
/r/MensRights25/12/17 07:38 AM
20

The absolute lack of personal responsibility of the ex wife in this is appalling. If she felt she was wasting her child bearing years on him, she should have communicated about that. If he still wasn't interested, she should have divorced him and pursued what she wanted in life. Blaming others for your failure to act doesn't make your life any better.
/r/MensRights13/10/17 07:14 AM
1

You really don't know how to show that someone is taking photos. Just admit your posturing about questioning those who do because you've got no idea how to figure that out. Cause the woman who confronted you is just as dumb and can't figure it out either. Good luck with the future secretary work, you're not cut out for law if you can't prove something like this.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 03:33 PM
1

No, how would you prove someone is taking pictures of children that aren't their own without access to their camera phone. I ask because you've repeatedly stated you think those who are should be questioned but you can't seem to figure out exactly how you would know that they were.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 03:15 PM
1

Now, describe how you would have satisfactory evidence of someone taking pictures of children without accessing someone's phone. If you can't figure out how to prove they are, please don't practice law for the DA, you won't be very good at it.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 03:05 PM
1

Now, describe how you would have satisfactory evidence of someone taking pictures of children without accessing someone's phone.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:44 PM
1

Good! Now, describe how you would have satisfactory evidence of someone taking pictures of children without accessing someone's phone. You're very adamant that those taking pictures should be confronted, so how do you know for certain that someone is both taking a picture and that picture is of children and those children are randomly chosen (i.e. not their own children). Remember, the answers from the innocent and guilty will be the same.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:30 PM
1

How about you explain how you looked any different than someone trying not to get caught taking pictures? How would you tell the difference and how do you judge when someone is supposed to be confronted? You mentioned you were a law student, so build your case and show how the logic structure works because from the observer's standpoint, both you and the cover pedophile are indistinguishable from an outside perspective.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 02:08 PM
1

What I'm saying is that while you seem to be gung-ho to confront pedophiles taking pictures but you can't seem to figure out how you'd form your criteria with a bulky camera and the photographer twisting their trademark evil waxed mustache. You don't seem to realize that the woman was doing the exact same thing you would do but she didn't assume that every pedophile camera needs to develop film in a dark room.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 01:52 PM
1

Unfortunately, camera phones have overtaken the Canon. Even then, what purpose does it serve to ask if someone was taking pictures when the innocent and the guilty would answer the same? Furthermore, in what was does having a child there prevent you from being a pedophile? You'd just be one with a good excuse.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 01:39 PM
1

I don't agree, because only you knew you weren't taking pictures, therefore only you knew you shouldn't be questioned. In the case you were taking pictures, you still would be the only one who knew for certain that you were taking pictures, therefore only you would know that you should be questioned. Because these two situations are indistinguishable from the standpoint of an outside observer, your statements do not mesh. Either you believe that anyone you think is taking pictures should be ques…
/r/MensRights22/04/17 01:17 PM
1

I think a man with a phone at a park deserves dignity, however. The kind of dignity that allows him to be at the park without being subject to unjust suspicion. How do you reconcile that with your previous statement:. A person on a playground taking pictures should be questioned. Given that nobody would know if you really were taking pictures or not?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:51 PM
1

Sounds like something a pedophile would say because only pedophiles hang out at playgrounds with camera phones. No reasonable photographers would be caught dead skulking about a playground with a camera.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:34 PM
1

How was she supposed to know you were a father there with his daughter? All she can see is that you have a camera phone and are hanging out at a playground. Since reasonable photographers wouldn't hang out at a playground, what was she supposed to think about you? People with cameras at playgrounds are suspicious and should be questioned because only pedophiles hang out with cameras at playgrounds. Even if she did question you, what makes you think a pedophile wouldn't say and act exactly how yo…
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:32 PM
1

You're the one hanging around children with your camera, of course you're going to say you weren't taking pictures of them. If you didn't deny it then they'd rightly kick the shit out of you for being a pedo.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:23 PM
1

a reasonable photographer isn't going to take pictures of random children at a park. So, Mr. I Stand At Playgrounds With A Camera Phone, a person on a playground taking pictures should be questioned, are you going to get all defensive and try to tell me you weren't taking pictures of children? Were you taking your camera for a walk?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:21 PM
1

Who cares that you're super sneaky about your random child photography (and that your camera also makes calls)? People with devices that can take pictures who are creeping around children should be questioned because only pedophiles take random pictures of children, so what were you doing with your camera phone?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:15 PM
1

What am I supposed to think when I see someone with a device that can take pictures who's hanging out around children? Those people are suspicious and should be confronted, because only pedophiles take random pictures of children.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:12 PM
1

Your phone has a camera, right? No reasonable photographer would take random pictures of children, so what sort of unreasonable photographer are you? The kiddy fiddling type? Edit: I don't really care that your camera also makes calls.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:08 PM
1

What were you doing with a camera at a playground? (BTW, I won't believe you if you say you weren't taking pictures of children.)
/r/MensRights22/04/17 12:04 PM
1

Your phone has a camera, right? And honestly, no reasonable photographer would be taking random pictures of children, so it's safe to assume you're a pedophile because you have a camera and if questioned you're going to lie and get defensive, just like a pedophile would. If you didn't notice, I'm paraphrasing things you've said. Edit: As for what leads someone to assume a man with a camera at a playground is taking pictures of children? The fact that reasonable photographers wouldn't take pictur…
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:58 AM
1

Would you believe a man holding a phone who you thought was taking pictures of children if they told you they weren't? Either she was confident that you were taking pictures or she thought you'd lie to her if she asked you if you actually were. Which is exactly what a creepy pedophile would say. From what you've written, you wouldn't believe your story either.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:41 AM
2

She thought you were taking pictures of children on a playground, you'd question someone you thought was doing the same, why shouldn't she?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:30 AM
3

Do you really not understand that's exactly what that woman was doing to you?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:20 AM
3

I really don't think they can understand that what they're saying is exactly what the women who confronted him was thinking. He repeatedly says he would question any man that he thought was taking pictures of children (because he assumes only a pedophile would take pictures of children) but can't seem to grasp the concept that if he saw some guy doing exactly what he was doing, that he'd question them.
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:17 AM
2

If that's the case, yes you were being dramatic by being offended about a woman assuming you were just a creepy pedophile taking pictures of children. If you would question anyone randomly taking pictures of children, why shouldn't she if she thinks you're doing the same?
/r/MensRights22/04/17 11:10 AM
2

You're making an assumption in the first question to anyone in the school (an optimistic and progressive assumption). Then the second question isn't specific enough to really garner an accurate answer. Though, if you assume your first question's answer is that anyone at that school can correctly identify that forced sex between a boy by a man is indeed rape (and that we can see that were in fact willing to lie and/or withhold information) then the second question should focus on if there is a di…
/r/MensRights21/03/17 01:50 AM
2

I'm a little lost on your second choice, why would they be paying $2 million from the start? Also, I acknowledged that it never directly stated that "They didn't consider boys raped on campus "real" rape victims", what I said was that it seemed to suggest that. The college had two options, act lawfully or act unlawfully. They chose to act unlawfully and were punished for doing so. A vast majority of the fine was for: “failure to properly classify reported incidents and disclose crime statistics …
/r/MensRights20/03/17 09:24 PM
1

In what way does not classifying rape victims as rape victims have nothing to do with dismissing rape victims?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 08:58 PM
1

What would be the difference between "They didn't consider boys raped on campus "real" rape victims" and "They didn't classify boys raped on campus as rape victims"?
/r/MensRights20/03/17 08:54 PM
90

I read through the article twice and I'm missing what's misleading about the headline. I understand that it wasn't stated directly but these pieces really stood out to me. triggered by the Jerry Sandusky child sex assault scandal The overwhelming majority — $2,167,500 — was for “failure to properly classify reported incidents failing to report or to adequately classify crimes All those quotes seem to indicate that makes who were raped weren't classified as such. Maybe I'm missing something but I…
/r/MensRights20/03/17 06:25 AM
2

I wanted to press charges against my ex who tried to bash my skull in, but the DA didn't think it was worth pursuing.
/r/MensRights01/11/16 06:55 PM
0

So, that's a no? Or what?
/r/MensRights29/10/16 06:56 PM
-1

Have you seen the Wikileaks emails about Hillary's thoughts on LGBT?
/r/MensRights29/10/16 04:48 AM
5

Innapropes!
/r/MensRights04/10/16 07:21 AM
1

Well, when the DA won't press charges... :(
/r/MensRights28/09/16 10:54 AM
1

But people interpret that "normal, and therefore the others are abnormal -- that's wrong, so we need to use cisgender". This is the part I'm objecting to. I think I may have made my point poorly for not referencing this earlier.
/r/MensRights12/09/16 05:42 PM
1

I'm abnormal. I'm left handed. It's not the norm. Only about 10% of people are. Do we need to refer to people as cishanded and transhanded?
/r/MensRights12/09/16 08:18 AM
1

How do you feel about the term: abnormal?
/r/MensRights12/09/16 08:16 AM
2

I'm sorry, but that's not the definition of irony. Being called a liar does evoke some very negative emotions in very many people. Especially when they are actually lying! All I'm saying, is that anyone who's heard the term "cry wolf" would understand this. If you want to be offended, go ahead! I'm very offended that people would be crying rape when they weren't in the first place. Though to call it offensive...
/r/MensRights19/08/16 07:51 PM
2

What's your definition of irony? I'm not sure that being called out for tone policing is ironic at all. Anyways, your suggestion isn't very effective. Everyone (effectively) knows what it means to cry wolf. It's clear and concise and evocative of the severity of the situation. A false accusations is an emotionless term which removes the emotional impact that ruining a life in this way has on an individual.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 06:37 PM
3

That sounds like tone policing. Honestly though, what term would you use to describe someone who attempted to do this? It needs to have the same serious implications because describing them as simply a liar gives no indication of the severity of their actions. Cultural ties would help people understand the issue.
/r/MensRights19/08/16 05:37 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter